"Devout" muslim sues Tesco for making him handle alhocol

[Facetious]

Devout Muslim sues Tesco for making him carry alcohol

By David Wilkes

Mohammed Ahmed: Quit his job with Tesco after complaining about having to handle alcohol

A Muslim who claims he did not know Tesco sold alcohol is suing the store for religious discrimination after having to carry crates of drink as part of his job.
Furthermore
Forklift truck driver Mohammed Ahmed, 32, worked in a distribution depot for eight months before quitting 'in protest', an employment tribunal heard.

He claims he was forced to leave because handling beer, spirits and wine is against his strict Islamic beliefs and that he was victimised when he asked the company to give him another role.

More


Are you the slightest bit sympathetic to this guys' cause ?
Mr. Ahmed's orthodoxy is his problem and it should remain that way until he makes other arrangements. It is not the responsibility of society to conform to his extremities.
Furthermore, this guy doesn't "handle alcohol", he merely handles the cartons and containers of which encompass the liquid. :tongue:

IMO, It's up to the people to rally against these encroachments. Your government will only seek the convenient - expedient route . . . . to acquiesce.

 

[calpoon]

why the sarcastic use of the word devout? Yes, reliigous people believe silly things and the stronger that they believe in them, the more they are venerated by religion.

but you don't have a problem with religion, you have a problem with anyone that isn't a straight, white, christian male, since these are apparently the only POV'S that you think "we" should bother to listen to or consider.

I keep asking these question, but I never get any real thoughtful answers. Why is this gentleman's belief that he should not have to handle alcohol less credible than that of someone who thinks that it's OK to buy, sell and consume it?

Both of them are are equally protected under the constitution, so I don't see any legitimate basis for saying one is more acceptable than the other.

If he worked at a bar that would be one thing, that would be unreasonable. He worked at a place that had many positions including one's that didn't require the handling of alcohol and they could have gave him one of those instead, that isn't unreasonable.

you guys always bitch about how people are "forced" to do things, but it only goes one way. This guy was "forced" to do something that was against his beliefs, but it's OK in this case. Hypocritical bullshit.

 

[Dawn]

A Muslim who claims he did not know Tesco sold alcohol

I just don't beleive that part. He is playing the poor innocent card there. Bull...


Besides that, if he have been victimised as he claims - that's indeed unacceptable.

 

[Dean Wormer]

If he worked at a bar that would be one thing, that would be unreasonable. He worked at a place that had many positions including one's that didn't require the handling of alcohol and they could have gave him one of those instead, that isn't unreasonable.

I agree. Perhaps they could have given him a job as a forklift operator handling pork.

 

[Funkwerkz]

What a silly stuff!

That man might expect a promotion but didn't receive, i think. And then, he sues corporation for a tiny thing. Oh Mr. Ahmad, Tesco also sells bacon. You ignored that.

Muslims don't like alcohol or bacon which christians enjoy, christians may not like other stuffs which muslims may like, jews may not like what others like. So, ban all those stuffs, eh?! WTF?! Enjoy the differences.

That man doesn't know any tiny thing. lol Handling "package" of alcohol is not a sin and definitely not against his beliefs. He lives in a way of what he ""heard"" from his society, instead of ""reading"" or ""searching"". What a crack!

 

[Bone]

once on the small island of Rota in the Pacific Islands, a Muslim sued three local youth for making him smoke pot, drink Budweiser and eat Spam. the case went to court where a jury found the fun-loving boys innocent. you see, smoking pot, drinking beer and eating Spam is part of the local culture and they were simply teaching the visitor the culture of the place.
:hatsoff:

 

[sexmadwife]

Following this logic then supermarket checkouts would have to have to take account of the operator's religion!

 

[Petra]

Following this logic then supermarket checkouts would have to have to take account of the operator's religion!

There's already been an uproar somewhere in the US where muslim checkout girls were pitching a fit because they had to check out customers alcohol and pork. I believe it was ruled since there was packaging over the actual product, they were SOL.

 

[tartanterrier]

Serves the lazy bastard right

 

[Will E Worm]

I don't drink and I stocked alcohol at Krogers. So, can I go back and sue them?
:dunno:

He should have maybe worn gloves and dealt with it.
It's not like he was forced to drink any.

I agree. Perhaps they could have given him a job as a forklift operator handling pork.

I'd like to see that.

Post pictures in the funny pictures forum.

 

[Facial_King]

This is one of those extremely rare cases when I take the side of the behemoth corporation, in this case Tesco. There are a million reasons to take issue with that chain, but this isn't one of them. Society (including Christians, Jews, Muslims, agnostics, atheists, etc.) that alcohol is a legal product and can be sold by licensed vendors. If your religion makes alcohol a problem for you, then you must separate yourself from society to the appropriate degree, including employment for anyone/anything that sells booze.

This reminds me of this thread - there's a real need for consistency on these issues:

http://board.freeones.com/showthread.php?t=246644&highlight=pharmacists+pill

 

[hiropro]

It`s the same as those who refuse to give out morning after pills because it is against their religion & beliefs.They are the ones who should be sued.The trouble is this world has gone sodding PC crazy.

 

[Will E Worm]

It`s the same as those who refuse to give out morning after pills because it is against their religion & beliefs.They are the ones who should be sued.The trouble is this world has gone sodding PC crazy.

Why? It's their business. They can sell or not sell what they wish.

 

[senob44]

I don't think this guy has much of a case. If his religion precludes him from handling alcohol, then he will just have to find employment somewhere where they don't have to handle alcohol. You have a right to practice religion, but a business should not have to make special accomodations for you just because of something that is basically a choice.

 

[AndyHunter]

What a load of bollocks!!
When in Rome.......
Why should we keep on bending over backwards to accommodate these people???
They have a choice..... stay here and work, pay your taxes and "fit in" or go back to your country of origin. If they were born here, then accept the way things are done in this country.

 

[Facial_King]

It`s the same as those who refuse to give out morning after pills because it is against their religion & beliefs.They are the ones who should be sued.The trouble is this world has gone sodding PC crazy.

Well, it's easy to agree that the world has gone crazy, but what I find interesting is how the now-meaningless term "PC" (politically-correct) is rarely, essentially never, applied to people like those who support right-wing religious zealot pharmacists who don't want to dispense the Pill. I think the term should be tossed away, as it's worthless, in any case, but I have found this one-way use of the term over time (with your notable exception hiropro!) to be interesting...

Why? It's their business. They can sell or not sell what they wish.

Again, the ONLY way a case could even BEGIN to be made for that, Will E, is if the pharmacists OWN their own pharmacies - otherwise, it's entirely comparable to these Tesco employees.

What a load of bollocks!!
When in Rome.......
Why should we keep on bending over backwards to accommodate these people???
They have a choice..... stay here and work, pay your taxes and "fit in" or go back to your country of origin. If they were born here, then accept the way things are done in this country.

Let's not forget that for a good period of time in the early 20th C. "the way things [were] done in this country" was, in fact, alcohol prohibition. And I suspect that the Muslim-American minority had little to do with it, as it probably does with the few American counties that insist on some variation of being "dry" - those are mostly places dominated by Christians, with ordinances put in place by zealous Christians. It's all crazy, be it coming from the Muslims or the Christians, in my opinions, but the point is that there are some overlaps in religions viewing alcohol as evil/an evil.

 

[Legzman]

and the stupidity continues...

 

[hiropro]

Why? It's their business. They can sell or not sell what they wish.

No.Not when they are employees of a company and are there to serve the public as they were in this and other cases.

 

[meesterperfect]

I think any fool who thinks this case has even the slightest amount of merit should be boiled in plum pudding and buried with a sprig of holly through their heart!

 

[Becks...poamr]

There's already been an uproar somewhere in the US where muslim checkout girls were pitching a fit because they had to check out customers alcohol and pork. I believe it was ruled since there was packaging over the actual product, they were SOL.

I remember stories like that.

Anyone remember a vaguely related story about taxi drivers who wouldn't pick up fares if they had alcohol?

I don't think this guy has much of a case. If his religion precludes him from handling alcohol, then he will just have to find employment somewhere where they don't have to handle alcohol. You have a right to practice religion, but a business should not have to make special accomodations for you just because of something that is basically a choice.

I was going to say the same thing.

And it took him 8 months to quit. No sympathy there. (Sorry. :tongue